|
judge the proposals of both candidates on their merits both as plans and as stepping-stones to single-payer.
I'm going to say now that I believe that as long as you can't opt out of risk, you shouldn't be able to opt out of the risk pool. That said, I have absolutely no idea how Clinton's plan can be realistically enforced, especially for the self-employed, unemployed, and with small businesses.
We have single-payer education (this is actually a complete lie, but for the purposes of this discussion we do), and so enforcement is easy; you pay taxes and that's it. I would be perfectly happy with mandatory payment to a single-payer healthcare scheme. Clinton's mandates are a whole different animal. If you could demonstrate how you could enforce the mandate universally, fairly, and cheaply, I would have less of a problem with it, but as it stands, I think the mandates will only provide the illusion of universality.
Now, as to which brings us closer to single-payer care? Neither. Single-payer will require a complete dismantling and rebuilding of the government's health-care program. Expanding government programs--which both Obama and Clinton do--is a good step. Mandating private insurance is not a stepping-stone towards single-payer care.
|